The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh at Srinagar has reprimanded the former Deputy Commissioner (DC) of Ganderbal for submitting a “palpably false pleading” before the Principal District Judge, Ganderbal, in a case concerning the illegal occupation of a six-storied commercial complex owned by a local resident, Abdul Majid Sofi.
A single bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar, according to Srinagar-based news gathering agency Kashmir Dot Com, has directed the then DC Shyambir Singh and other officials to pay rent for the period they forcibly occupied the building and has recommended criminal proceedings against the officer for misleading the court.
The judgment comes just months after Singh, a 2018-batch IAS officer, faced criminal contempt proceedings in 2024 for allegedly intimidating a judge. While those proceedings were dropped after Singh tendered an unconditional apology, the latest order has once again put him in the spotlight for his conduct during his tenure as DC Ganderbal.
“This conduct of a responsible officer of the Government is reprehensible and shows that the said officer has no respect for the rule of law. The officer concerned did not think twice before filing a false written statement before the learned trial court with a view to defeat the claim of the petitioner,” the single bench said.
The court further stated that the then DC Ganderbal “deserves to be proceeded against for having filed a false pleading before the learned District Judge, Ganderbal.”
According to details, the case pertains to the illegal occupation of a commercial complex, “Namroze,” located at Beehama, Ganderbal, by the District Administration, Ganderbal, in December 2020. The building, owned by Abdul Majid Sofi, was leased to the Central University of Kashmir for use as a boys’ hostel. However, the District Administration forcibly took over the building without the consent of either the owner or the university, citing the need to accommodate politically protected persons due to security reasons.
The court, while hearing the case, noted that the DC Ganderbal had filed a written statement in a civil suit claiming that the building was “not in occupation of the District Administration,” which was later found to be false.
“This stand of the Deputy Commissioner is contrary to the stand of the respondents taken in this writ petition. The Courts generally trust the statements of public officers given by them in their pleadings at their face value, but the present case is a classic example of a public officer filing misleading pleadings before the Court just to defeat the rightful claim of a litigant,” the court remarked.
The court has directed the respondents, including the DC Ganderbal, to pay rent at the rate of Rs. 12 per square foot (built-up area) for the period from December 21, 2020, to June 6, 2024, when the building was illegally occupied. Additionally, they have been ordered to clear outstanding electricity and water charges amounting to Rs. 22,43,510.
The court also stated that the right to property is a constitutional right under Article 300A of the Constitution of India and cannot be taken away without due process of law.
“The manner in which the property of the petitioner has been taken over by respondents No.1 to 5 by snatching it away from the tenant of the petitioner, who was in its actual possession without informing the petitioner, clearly goes on to show that respondents No.1 to 5 have not adopted due process of law,” the court said.
The court has sent a copy of the judgment to the Principal District Judge, Ganderbal, for initiating appropriate criminal proceedings against the then DC Ganderbal.
Singh’s Troubled Tenure and 2024 Contempt Case
Shyambir Singh, who was recently transferred from Ganderbal, had a tenure as DC Ganderbal marred by controversy, including a criminal contempt case in 2024. The case was initiated after allegations surfaced that Singh had abused his official position to intimidate and harass Judge Fayaz Ahmad Qureshi, the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) of Ganderbal.
The contempt proceedings stemmed from a petition filed on January 20, 2023, seeking the enforcement of a court judgment dated October 31, 2022. Judge Qureshi had ordered the attachment of Singh’s salary for non-compliance with the court’s orders. In response, Singh had allegedly engaged in “revengeful acts” against the judge, including initiating an investigation into the judge’s assets and attempting to “scandalize” the judiciary.
The court had noted that Singh had “misused his official machinery” to trace documents related to a small land parcel purchased by Judge Qureshi in 2009. A team of revenue officials, allegedly acting on Singh’s orders, had visited the site with “oblique and malafide motives” to manipulate the land records and portray the judge’s property as “Khascharai” (common grazing land).
In its order dated July 23, 2023, the court had described Singh as a “constant potential threat” to the judiciary and recommended his transfer from Ganderbal. It had also issued a show-cause notice to Singh and referred the matter to the High Court for initiating criminal contempt proceedings.
However, in August 2024, Singh had tendered an unconditional apology before the CJM, Ganderbal, which was accepted by the High Court. The court had stated, “This Court feels that the officer’s repentance is not manipulated. The exercising of jurisdiction by this Court was not an act of vindictiveness but only to enforce the Constitutional Separation of Powers and also to protect the functionalities of the Judges of the district judiciary.”
The court had expunged any observations detrimental to Singh’s service prospects, stating, “Any observation made by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ganderbal, in the reference, or by this Court in these proceedings, which may be detrimental to the service prospects of the contemnor, stand expunged and the same shall not be taken into consideration for any official purposes whatsoever.” (KDC)
